Mueller Report Brings Into Focus Obama's Attempted Coup Against Trump

[Okie + 83]

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

On 5/4/2019 at 5:26 PM, Jan van Eck said:

The real undercurrent problem is that Big Tech is loose on the range. It gets hard to dissent if you are pre-emptively squashed. 

While hate speech is protected, that only applies in the case of State Action. 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/state_action_requirement

It is related to the concept of Agency in law (if you cannot do something because it is illegal or impermissible, you cannot send someone else to do it, either).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_agency

So Facebook (or any other actor) can independently set any kind of policy it wants.  You are always free to choose another platform.  (Leaving aside the issue of whether Facebook is a monopoly or not.)

[WayneMechEng + 89]

On 4/11/2019 at 3:34 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

The rabbit hole goes deep.  They never thought Hillary would lose. 

Here's just one of the many reasons why I use DuckDuckGo for my research searches rather than Google:

 

Yesterday on my Android, after reading an article, a Google survey popped up.  There were about 7 choices. One was, "Was the article helpful?" No problem.   But another was, "Do you consider this hate speech?".  I was only doing innocuous research.  But does Google now want us to vote to censor others free speech thus deflecting the blame of them shutting down sites?  How will the survey results be used?  If they get reports, does Google then decide who to shut down?  Based on recent experience, the tribal mobs will kill anything and everything they don't like.

 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

3 hours ago, Okie said:

 

Again I ask, why wouldn't you want to help the federal law enforcement solve or investigate a crime?

The answer to your query is very short, and quite succinct:  "Martha Stewart."

Stay away from those Feds, folks; stay far, far away.  They do not have your interests at heart.  They do not have society's interests at heart.  they only have their own interests at heart.  Those interests include crushing political dissenters.  Think back to the days of the Vietnam Draft.  The FBI planted undercovers inside those anti-draft grassroots organizations, to spy on the membership and record the names of anyone who showed up.  Those names were then immediately drafted.  Anyone who refused, was sent to the Federal jail for five years, then drafted again when they got out.  If you refused again, they sent you to that jail for another five years.  Teach you to protest the Government, you little twerp. You have nothing to say.  You will obey, and most important, you will submit.  Lyndon Johnson said so.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

3 hours ago, Okie said:

While hate speech is protected, that only applies in the case of State Action. 

Who is talking about "hate speech"?  Not me.  I have not even gone there.  I am talking about political dissenters.  You don't like the government's policies of the day, you end up with the FBI brickyard agents looking for you to do their oppressive "interview."  Watch out, that leads to a bill of indictment to some secret Grand Jury.  Watch out:  there are two agents, and only one of you.  Those guys can and will write up anything they like, truth is a malleable concept to the FBI.  It is also a quite malleable concept to the RCMP, for you Canadians reading this who are feeling all warm and superior. Don't live in some fantasy construct about the federal cops.  Once they write you up, you can expect to be cooked.  Look at Martha Stewart;  she ended up doing a year in the federal jail in Pennsylvania.  Don't be another Martha Stewart victim, folks.  Keep your big mouth shut around the cops. They are not your friend. They work for the Government.  And you are not the Government. You, yup you, are the Target. 

Edited May 8, 2019 by Jan van Eck

[Okie + 83]

13 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Who is talking about "hate speech"?

Most of the people who have been banned from Facebook have promoted what is classified as "hate speech."

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

7 hours ago, Okie said:

Most of the people who have been banned from Facebook have promoted what is classified as "hate speech."

 

 

 

 

 

< *ahem* >

Yes, this person on the New York Times Editorial Board actually said this, along with other similar statements.  Result: not banned from Facebook.  Double Standard much?

 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

5 minutes ago, Okie said:

Most of the people who have been banned from Facebook have promoted what is classified as "hate speech."

And how about the people who get banned from the Town Green - or any other public forum?  

See, there's your problem: the government of the day uses its police powers to suppress dissenters to the government and its policies. Around here, when the Justice for Migrant Farmworkers go write articles or organize protest at the Capitol or Governor's Office  (or even at the offices of the secret spies of the ICE Department)  they immediately are arrested and held in some govt isolation jail several States away.  That separates the protesters from their lawyers, a prime objective, and it keeps them in some jail and incommunicado, another prime objective.  Only people with money escape the dragnet.

To show you what a Border Patrol dragnet looks like in sleepy Vermont, check it out  (this one is from two days ago):

They found nobody, but sure did the invasive search of the locals  (lots of whom have developed a dislike for these guys, and in true Vermonter fashion are not shy about voicing their opinions.  Hey, Ethan Allen wasn't shy, either, now was he?)  Notice the drug dog. 

[Itsover In2020 + 1]

https://www.vox.com/2018/8/3/17644704/sarah-jeong-new-york-times-tweets-backlash-racism

 

[shadowkin + 584]

19 hours ago, Okie said:

You are complaining about the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, passed over a century ago?  You do know that an Amendment to the Constitution is part of the Constitution, right?  I cannot believe that you would complain about that.

c

You conveniently left out that I said 'legally'. The fact is the original constitution was changed. Period. Just because you rounded up enough votes doesn't mean you haven't trampled on it. So what if it was over a century ago. 

If its your position it's a living document then you should have no issue with Trump's desire to change it.

[shadowkin + 584]

15 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

 

 

 

 

 

< *ahem* >

Yes, this person on the New York Times Editorial Board actually said this, along with other similar statements.  Result: not banned from Facebook.  Double Standard much?

 

Is it just me or does Eminem look like a an angry lesbian who has aged badly?

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

Eminem is pro free-speech, if you think otherwise you have not listened to Eminem. 

Hating Trump doesn't mean you are against free speech; I hate the scum and spout off all the time!  Yes I realize the comment was about the media. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

21 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

 

 

 

 

 

I would say Hitler was an evil genius; Trump is not genius or as evil.

[SERWIN + 749]

On 5/8/2019 at 9:06 PM, Enthalpic said:

I would say Hitler was an evil genius; Trump is not genius or as evil.

And I know he is referred to as a "racist" by the libtards out there, but I really don't believe he is out to blame all our problems on the Jews, or that he is secretly planning to eliminate them all......

[Bhimsen Pachawry + 72]

On 5/8/2019 at 2:35 AM, SERWIN said:

China steals technology, they don't develop it, and if I remember correctly, GB Jr GAVE China a financial aid package of what? About 6 Billion dollars to jump start everything around that time, but as usual, everyone forgets about those things when backstabbing begins. And how would China collect that loan if they wanted it back? Come and get it......The only reason China has become the power it is today is BECAUSE of US involvement.....

You are speaking as if China was in debt or had financial difficulty in early 2000s? China was already beginning to bulge and grow rapidly. With or without USA< the CHinese infrastructure creation itself was enough for growth.

USA is not responsible for all countries growing. Other countries also can grow while standing on their own feet. USA can only see its limits and make favourable deals to share the benefit.

[Michael Joyce + 2]

This is how we got here. sure the soviet Union is gone but the useful idiots in academia, the press, and government carried on to obtain power. Watch this KGB agent and see if it doesn't apply.

https://youtu.be/bX3EZCVj2XA

Edited May 12, 2019 by Michael Joyce

[Okie + 83]

 

1 hour ago, Michael Joyce said:

This is how we got here. sure the soviet Union is gone but the useful idiots in academia, the press, and government carried on to obtain power. Watch this KGB agent and see if it doesn't apply.

I met Mr. Bezmenov back in my 20s (30 years ago).  When he talked about his escape from India via a disguise, it was very catching.  But when he started talking about his life in the U.S., it was clear he held a lot of prejudices (against people of color) and failed to see a bigger picture.  Sure, he was very anti-communist; but today, Russia is no longer a communist country.  In fact, it is more of a kleptocratic fascist state.  Considering that he was an apartment manager at the time I met him, part of it might have been due to his own feelings of life not being as rosy as he expected.  By the time I met him, he no longer had to hide because enough time had passed.

Just be aware that he is just one voice among many and there are many other perspectives to consider.

[SERWIN + 749]

On 5/11/2019 at 12:49 PM, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

You are speaking as if China was in debt or had financial difficulty in early 2000s? China was already beginning to bulge and grow rapidly. With or without USA< the CHinese infrastructure creation itself was enough for growth.

USA is not responsible for all countries growing. Other countries also can grow while standing on their own feet. USA can only see its limits and make favourable deals to share the benefit.

Because you have been told that by your government? They wouldn't lie to you, would they? Just like Cadillac spending, how many millions to make a propaganda film touting the strength a glory of the communist party over there? Just so they could get a foothold and be able to give the upper crust cars so they would be in favor of American companies coming over there and bringing tech for the gov't to copy? You have to keep in mind that the Soviets stole tech too, but when the communists get hold of tech they don't know how to implement it correctly, they are more than willing to forego the safety systems that are on that tech to make it cheaper and easier to make. Eventually disaster comes around because of that lapse of reasoning and who pays? The people do......

And if you really believe that your country was able to grow on it's own, then maybe the Chinese gov't should start sending manufacturing away and please, please please show the rest of the world how well they can stand on their own "two feet". Quit stealing the tech and actually develope it yourselves.. 

[Bhimsen Pachawry + 72]

11 minutes ago, SERWIN said:

Because you have been told that by your government? They wouldn't lie to you, would they? Just like Cadillac spending, how many millions to make a propaganda film touting the strength a glory of the communist party over there? Just so they could get a foothold and be able to give the upper crust cars so they would be in favor of American companies coming over there and bringing tech for the gov't to copy? You have to keep in mind that the Soviets stole tech too, but when the communists get hold of tech they don't know how to implement it correctly, they are more than willing to forego the safety systems that are on that tech to make it cheaper and easier to make. Eventually disaster comes around because of that lapse of reasoning and who pays? The people do......

And if you really believe that your country was able to grow on it's own, then maybe the Chinese gov't should start sending manufacturing away and please, please please show the rest of the world how well they can stand on their own "two feet". Quit stealing the tech and actually develope it yourselves.. 

I am Indian, not Chinese, FYI.

I have been studying rise of china and they rose because of hard work. USA sanctioned China as far as possible but still China developed its own technology and infrastructure. The so called IP infringement by China is only in worthless things like toys, cars, phone design etc but not in critical technology as these were sanctioned by the west. USA is so silly that it even got iphone rectangular bevel shape patented! Calling such petty things as ideas and IPR is laughable!

China is a utility oriented country and not aesthetic oriented one like the west. So, Chinese work has always been to get results and they got it. USa tried its best to stop China by technology sanctions but China overcame that and went on.

[shadowkin + 584]

On 5/11/2019 at 10:49 AM, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

China was already beginning to bulge and grow rapidly. With or without USA< the CHinese infrastructure creation itself was enough for growth.

USA is not responsible for all countries growing. Other countries also can grow while standing on their own feet. USA can only see its limits and make favourable deals to share the benefit.

 

5 hours ago, Bhimsen Pachawry said:

I have been studying rise of china and they rose because of hard work. USA sanctioned China as far as possible but still China developed its own technology and infrastructure. The so called IP infringement by China is only in worthless things like toys, cars, phone design etc but not in critical technology as these were sanctioned by the west. USA is so silly that it even got iphone rectangular bevel shape patented! Calling such petty things as ideas and IPR is laughable!

China is a utility oriented country and not aesthetic oriented one like the west. So, Chinese work has always been to get results and they got it. USa tried its best to stop China by technology sanctions but China overcame that and went on.

Most people probably stopped reading after you claimed IP for cars was worthless.

That said your posts display an ignorant understanding of these countries' economic growth. The US has, since WW2, underwritten the growth of Western Europe and Japan with the Marshall Fund and more or less unfettered access to the US market (while not receiving the same in return, especially in Japan/Asia), and technology transfers. We also educated alot of Japanese and Chinese engineers/scientists.

For Europe/Japan this all happened under our defense umbrella, allowing them to concentrate their resources on economic development.

Granted, this was largely motivated by securing a capitalist bloc to oppose the USSR. Those days are gone and we're no longer willing to grant our allies the same privileges. Rightly so in my eyes. 

With China it was done in the hope we could change Chinese behavior. Always a fool's errand I believe. Our politicians have finally woken up.

This isn't to take away from the efforts of the Europeans, Japanese, and Chinese to develop their economies but it would not have occurred at the same pace had the above not been in place.

Incorrect about Chinese supposedly valuing utility over aesthetic. Chinese, SE Asians generally, are extremely image conscious which is why they love brand name things, like most people.

I find your pimping for China especially hilarious as Chinese regard for Indians is, shall we say, not the highest.

[shadowkin + 584]

On 5/12/2019 at 8:47 AM, Michael Joyce said:

This is how we got here. sure the soviet Union is gone but the useful idiots in academia, the press, and government carried on to obtain power. Watch this KGB agent and see if it doesn't apply.

I would traditional celebrities to the list. And the universe of useful idiots has expanded to include social media personalities. The thing about academia nowadays is that many universities are simply businesses that are saddling young people with useless degrees and crushing debt. So they are useful idiots in more ways than one.

[Bhimsen Pachawry + 72]

8 hours ago, shadowkin said:

Most people probably stopped reading after you claimed IP for cars was worthles

IP for aesthetic design is useless for any item. Only technology IP matters. Aesthetics and design must not have IP as they are not "knowledge". These are useless things people buy because they have too much time and resource and too little work. Why is it hard to understand? These are non-utilitarian and hence "useless".

8 hours ago, shadowkin said:

That said your posts display an ignorant understanding of these countries' economic growth. The US has, since WW2, underwritten the growth of Western Europe and Japan with the Marshall Fund and more or less unfettered access to the US market (while not receiving the same in return, especially in Japan/Asia), and technology transfers. We also educated alot of Japanese and Chinese engineers/scientists.

Japan, Korea, Taiwan & Germany are vassal state of USA. Even now they are under USA occupation and are not allowed to develop defence items. For example, Japan was not allowed to develop its own military jet engine by USA. So, the so called teaching by USA is only to make vassal states.

Countries like USSR, China, India etc were big on their own and developed their own education and scientific technology. USA only taught those materials which were already in the open space and hence not "high end" technical knowledge. Moreover, US itself was a beneficiary of German technology and scientists who were taken from Germany after WW2.

Technology like missile, nuclear bombs and other military & space technology were mastered by the countries like China, India, USSR independently of USA. Even semiconductor technology were independently developed as USA continually sanctioned any technology or tool transfer. 

Considering all this, it is really funny that you claim USA taught a lot of things to China.

8 hours ago, shadowkin said:

Granted, this was largely motivated by securing a capitalist bloc to oppose the USSR. Those days are gone and we're no longer willing to grant our allies the same privileges. Rightly so in my eyes. 

With China it was done in the hope we could change Chinese behavior. Always a fool's errand I believe. Our politicians have finally woken up.

This isn't to take away from the efforts of the Europeans, Japanese, and Chinese to develop their economies but it would not have occurred at the same pace had the above not been in place

USA provoked China by rising people via Church and NGOs to rebel against China in 1989 Tianamen square. So, USA helping China never was a reality. It was more or less like USA troubling China and other countries.

You are misunderstanding about pace of growth. Technology is mainly about knowledge, not economy. So, as long as there is basic quantity of resource and brain power, the technology can be made quickly. The only reason why USA economy is big is because it fooled Arabs into giving free oil in petrodollar deal in return for military support to spreading Islam. 

In technology terms, other countries also could develop at reasonably fast pace on their own. As long as you can show me which technology from USA was given to China, I will not be convinced that Chinese growth was influenced by USA. The key to development is technology advancement and any other superficiality is not important.

8 hours ago, shadowkin said:

Incorrect about Chinese supposedly valuing utility over aesthetic. Chinese, SE Asians generally, are extremely image conscious which is why they love brand name things, like most people.

I find your pimping for China especially hilarious as Chinese regard for Indians is, shall we say, not the highest.

I am not pimping for China. I am just busting propaganda. Give credit where it is due

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

BOOM

“IT’S OVER… you lost”

“Some of you will wind up in handcuffs, notably, Jim Comey, Jim Baker, Andy McCabe and John Brennan. Some of you will suffer a worse fate…

“When the clear eyes of history look back on this, you will be on the wrong side of liberty, freedom and the bill of rights.

And to the media goons, lunatic hacks in the media, who tried to gas light us into believing that collusion was real and spying was fake,

know this:

“In the one moment you had to shine and save the REPUBLIC and do the right thing… you failed.

Your kids will be embarrassed by you, your grandkids will be embarrassed by you. History will use you as an example of exactly not to do when entering into the field of journalism.

You will become a STAIN on our country from this point on…

You people in the media will be remembered as accomplices in the biggest scandal in American history. You’re a disgrace, a disgrace to everything this country stands for.”

“I’m embarrassed for you, you disgust me.”

-Dan Bongino

 

https://youtu.be/g7DvVg1dEBQ

 

“Finally, a DOCUMENTED admission of guilt. Summed up in an official Obama-era State Department document. And you wonder how Mueller’s investigative team missed it.

As reported by The Hill,

If ever there were an admission that taints the FBI’s secret warrant to surveil Donald Trump’s campaign, it sat buried for more than 2 1/2 years in the files of a high-ranking State Department official.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s written account of her Oct. 11, 2016, meeting with FBI informant Christopher Steele shows the Hillary Clinton campaign-funded British intelligence operative admitted that his research was political and facing an Election Day deadline.

And that confession occurred 10 days before the FBI used Steele’s now-discredited dossier to justify securing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page and the campaign’s ties to Russia.

Be still my heart. The Hill actually used the term “discredited” to describe the Steele dossier.”

 

https://theblacksphere.net/2019/05/doomsday-democrats-wont-wriggle-out-of-this/

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 4/29/2019 at 11:03 PM, DC_Zee said:

Could someone please define "deep state" for me? Is it billionaires, corporations, politicians, military or the justice system or a combination of some of them? Can anyone name some names here that are at the head of the "Deep State"? I hear the term "the swamp" being used a lot,...is that the same as the "Deep State"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state_in_the_United_States

[Bahmi + 1]

William Barr is supposedly Deep State. Do we expect his broom to sweep cleanly?  When donkeys fly, that's when.

[Bahmi + 1]

On 5/16/2019 at 10:57 PM, ronwagn said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state_in_the_United_States

My wife asks me about various and sundry subjects. If I cannot provide answers, I consult my choice of search engines and /or trusted blogs. Or, I suggest that she consult with these varied sources. Try it, you'll get answers galore.